About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
CSPAN 64
LANGUAGE
English 64
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 64 (some duplicates have been removed)
itself at that level to deal with the reactor in syria. the bush administration organized its iraq policy in another way. there are several models out there but it is important that i ran not be seen as one of 10 or 15 problems we have to deal with on a daily basis. iran is problem number one and will be for awhile. there are plenty of other problems in the middle east. first, syria -- i concur with everything dennis said. first of all, for the longest time, many people thought the fall of assad was inevitable so we would not have to do that much to provoke it. i'm not so sure, not because i don't think this insurgency is effected. i have been on the receiving end of a number of insurgencies in my career is. this is a very powerful and effective one. iran has command -- has committed -- syria has committed powerful friends that appear to be ready to go to the mat to make sure the assad regime will stay in power. that is russia and iran. the result could be an assad that stays in power, an iranian victory that will mark the good for our efforts to move iran to the negotiating table on nucl
in tunisia and egypt, then we -- people saying well in places like syria, you have divided communities, divided societies, where in europe -- tunisia you have different groups. in egypt when they had the parliamentary election people assumed that there was prince reply -- support in groups. they did. they controlled most of the policies. well, wip a few months, what do we have? we have even though 46% turned out for that election, remarkably, and the muslim brotherhood has been good in turning out people. their candidates get only 1/4 of the vote. then if you have the final round , the two plrks it was so close we didn't know the results. so egypt is divided somewhat. the brotherhood after the parliamentary election, they have carte plan much, but they discovered they don't. they have been sending in pressure from the right. the writing of these institutions. today, as we speak, in tahrir square there are smowsu thousands of people demonstrating. going for essentially more specific reference to the sharia religious law in the constitution where there is a deal where more moderates are
for syria. china cannot recently with a four-point plan. did you take this seriously? if so, could this be part of the new normal, china looking at a crisis the west is unable to solve far from its shores and saying, we have a position to take and could play a role on this? >> on to the back row. thank you for your brevity, folks. >> early in the discussion, you had asked about the dispute for the islands. your response was the chinese response was part of a long-term plan. in recent years, we have seen china make tremendous efforts certainly in the western hemisphere and africa to build an infrastructure to gain access of raw materials. at the same time, we have also seen them a tremendous efforts to build military to military relations. my question for the panel is, is that military dimension just an effort to protect economic interests or is it some part of a long-term plan to help lay the foundations for their assent to the position as a global power? >> one last gentleman and what neil diamond would call the tree people, hot august night. this gentleman. run the microphone to
and syria. the whole house will be united in concern both at the intolerable situation for the residents of southern israel and the grave loss of life and humanitarian in gaza including the particular impact on children. on the 14th of november, the israeli defense forces began air strikein response to a sharp increase in rocket fire. hamas and other militant groups responded with other rocket fire. as of today, three israeli citizens have been killed and at least 109 palestinians including 33 women and 26 children -- 11 women and 26 children also lled. we have made clear that hamas have the principal responsibility for the start of the current crisis but also that all sides have responsibilities. we quickly called on israel to seek every opportunity to de escalate their militaryesponse and to observe international humanitarian law and avoid civilian casualties. yesterday e.u. foreign ministers condemned the rocket attacks on israel and called for an urgent cessation of hostilities. we have also warned that a ground invasion of gaza could length b the conflict, and erode international su
important than what happens in the united states, we do not cover it. we are engaged by what happens syria, but i do not know if shed a great deal of light. i know you began by asking what is happening in gaza and what i think about that. >> yes. >> any time israel is involved in a story, did becomes excruciatingly -- id becomes excruciatingly difficult to cover, because there is a sense of identity in this country with israelis, and many reporters, old friends and colleagues of mine used to be criticized for taking an anti- israeli point of view. he spent many years living in the arab world and had a sympathetic. of view to arabs. i think what is happening in gaza right now meets in the definition of tragedy. the israelis cannot be expected to stand by while their cities are rocketed. on the other hand, the idea that the israeli defense forces are equally professional, the number of casualties on the palestinian side are going to be much greater. they are leaving an impression there is something unfair. this is the time you need correspondents who have spent years in the region, because b
peaceful protests. obviously the situation in syria has deteriorated since then. we have been engaged to help the opposition. we have committed to hundreds of millions of dollars of humanitarian aid to help folks both inside of syria and outside of syria. we are constantly consulting with the opposition on how they can get organized so that they're not splinters and divided in the face of the onslaught from the assaad regime. we are in very close contact with countries like turkey and jordan that immediately border syria and have an impact and obviously israel which is having already grave concerns as we do about, for example, movements of chemical weapons that might occur in such a chaotic atmosphere. and they could have an impact not just within syria but on the reas a whole. i'm encouraged to see that the syrian opposition created an umbrella group that may have more cohesion than they had in the past. we're going to be talking to them, my envoys are going to be traveling to various meetings taking place with the international community and the opposition. we consider them a legiti
. and then there's the issue of syria. please say some words about what you see as the next steps with regard to iran. how do we see that unfolding in the time ahead? what's the way forward with syria? >> yeah. three things. one, you know, the arab spring turned out to be less spring and probably better term is arab awakening. we're going to go through springs and winters and summers and falls and it's going to vary country to country and it will take a long time. but look, it was iventable, unavoidable and actually a good thing that the people of the arab world should start taking some responsibility for their future. and there's just no going back and it is very much in our interest how these awakenings come out and that they result in societies that are democratic, that are producing a better life for their people and we should do everything we can in a smart way, recognizing we're not so popular in the middle east right now, to try to help get that outcome. there are a couple big threats to that. one is syria and i'm more worried about syria in terms of the middle east then anything and t
. dennis ross and james jeffrey address the unrest in syria and their concerns about egypt house and government. this is an hour and 35 minutes. clucks a good afternoon. welcome to the washington institution -- institute. i'm delighted to see all of you today. i think the interest in foreign policy and the wake of our presidential election is evident by the standing room only crowd we have here today. we are now already into the process of transition, transition even with the same president. transitions are the most fluid and receptive moments in the presidential cycle that may have an impact on the policy process. so, i take it that it is a good sign that there is a much interest in the foreign-policy process by your presence here today. i think the transition from a first to second on the administration may begin the day after election, but it does not end on inauguration day. this process is going to continue for some time. as the new old team goes through the inevitable time of reassessment and redefinition of priorities and opportunities, and as other issues, domestic issues
: what do. the next move is for syria? -- what do you think the next move is? guest: the top general in britain said they would be considering a move there. there's a conversation but in washington and other international capitals of their needs to be something done. winter is coming. you may not know this, but winter in syria is quite cold. those who have been displaced from their homes, there is, i think, 35,000 casualties in the 19th month of this civil war. host: here's a tweet from david cameron. given what you have just said about syria, could there be pressure from our allies to make a bolder move in syria? guest: the u.s. is already doing something. it does not seem like there is additional pressure. the rest of the u.s. allies, turkey, they are afraid of getting involved. the only pressure, or the most active countries right now we're probably -- are probably qatar and saudi arabia. we have troops and special forces along the border who are vetting who those bombs get delivered to. it is unclear exactly what the status of that is right now, but i do not feel that allies, as
called the zero obama's policy towards syria -- called the obama's policy toward syria shameful. this is just about one hour. >> good afternoon. the last session before lunch, the good guys, the special burden on democratic nations. we have a star-studded cast and i will hand it over to our moderator, kathleen koch. >> . ruhle for joining us today. the title of our panel in and of itself, "the good guys?" it reflects the self doubt that many of us have had today house we'll lot at a recent intervention in countries like iraq, afghanistan. we asked ourselves, were we the good guys? did we get it right? did we do the right thing? did we do more harm than good? in our panel today, i would like us not to look back, not to rehash the past, but let's look forward and really reflect on the lessons learned in these interventions and see how they can inform the actions of our communities of democracies as we move forward into the future. first, we have a panel that virtually needs no introduction but i will briefly introduce them. juan carlos pinzo. senator john mccain. someone who i hav
] >> that this time. thank you. mitt romney now wants a larger role for the united states in syria. he would like to see as helping and working with others to supply rebels with arms. what should we do about syria and what american involvement and intervention would you support to prevent iran from developing a nuclear weapon. >> what he is a link to his own -- what assad is doing to his own people is terrible. it has to stop. he has to go. in iran, what is critical is they are not permitted to develop nuclear weapons. they are a danger to the region, our ally israel, and they are a danger to the entire world. with a nuclear iran, we not only have the risks of more terrorists getting access to nuclear weapons, more people in the region one nuclear weapons, it is destabilizing to the world. it means the whole world has an interest in making sure that they do not develop nuclear weapons. that is why i support the approach that has been used by president obama. that is he takes nothing off the table when he goes in. but he comes in and tries to work with other countries in order to bring pressure,
. >> thousands of people in syria are being killed and the suffering is immense. authorities in the country say the british assistance has been slow and the priority ought to be supporting the civil administration councils so that basic water and sewage services can be connected. what more can the prime minister do to discuss with president obama to really bring about a solution to this crisis? >> deputy prime minister? >> i know the prime minister who is of course in the region right now discusses this on an ongoing basis with the president of the united states and will continue to do so. we are the second largest bilateral donor in syria. of course the circumstances on the ground are incredibly difficult in the delivery of aid and assistance but we need to make every effort we can to accelerate had a, get it to the right people in a timely manner and in the right place and any suggestions he wishes to make to the department for international development and others about how we should do that. >> lillian greenwood. >> mr. speaker, official documents show the healthier together reviews best opt
killed in syria each month and the suffering of people is immense. sources within the countries a british assistance has been slow and the priority would be supporting the civil administration counsel so the basic water and syrian services can be connected. want more and the prime minister to to discuss with president obama to really bring about a solution to this crisis? >> i know that the prime minister who of course is in the region right now discusses this on an ongoing basis with the president of the united states, and will continue to do so. where the second largest natural don't in syria. of course, the circumstances on the ground are incredibly different -- difficult, but we need to make every other weekend to celebrate that, get to the people in a timely manner in the right place but any suggestions what we need to make to the department for international development and others about how we should do that, of course, will be -- >> official documents show the healthiest quote best option is downgrading general hospitals, amt, maternity, children of acute services and cutting 550 o
years. you've had dramatic circumstances in egypt and libya and tunisia. they're working on syria. you could point to examples in borrow ran, for example, that's not moving as fast. part of the obama philosophy is very -- which is very interesting is trying to find what is possible in this area that does not get america caught in the trap of unnecessary war, repetition of quagmire. you have two examples of egypt and libya which are most striking. people on the streets clear my opposition to the dictator there. there are plenty of examples, for example, bush in tan man square. -- ton man square. -- tiananmen square. there's lots of examples where we tell folks -- bush sr. and iraq telling saddam if you want to crack down the shia, so be it . and because of that factor, that's one of the key factors that got them pushed out. libya was a different story where you have the possibility of a massacre occurring and obama said i would like to stop that from happening, very much so. but if i can't get a true blue international coalition through the u.n., then i might not do it. >> how about a t
, and at the forefront of efforts to isolate assad in syria. we've got us out of the bailout fund and rejecting the treaty that was not of interest. i am a prime minister who said even in tough economic times of britain will not break its promises to the poorest of our world. i am sharing the united nations high-level panel of development with ambition of eradicating absolute poverty in our world. i am a prime minister who will work closely with president obama in a renewed effort on the middle east peace process, and let us congratulate him tonight on winning a historic second term. yes, i am a prime minister who will -- you will bring troops home from afghanistan. let us all take a moment to pay tribute, as we all did yesterday, to the extraordinary courage of the brave servicemen and women who across the generations have given their lives for our safety and freedom. [applause] now i have spoken about the traditional foreign policy issues on many occasions, but tonight i wanted to make a different kind of speech. do not worry, not about the bbc. [laughter] because i have done something else w
its ability to be a kind of problem region. i think syria has been of a bigot, a sobering reality check for the turks -- has been a big, sobering reality check for the turks. i do not see a huge gap because they are now home to -- they would like to see a more activist eu policy to relieve the burden on themselves. i do not think we have any huge differences over the long term outcomes in syria. >> yes. the gentlemen. -- gentleman. >> i have some questions about iran and nuclear policy. in the last press conference by president obama -- a something in this press conference which i thought was different from the past. all along in recent months he has been talking about a nuclear bomb or nuclear weapon, specifically mentioning that a something iran cannot get. in a press conference, he went beyond that and said nuclear capability. i wonder if this is the same position, or is this something new, changing course? the second thing is -- for the entire panel, ellen laipson, too. the red lines, basically encouraged by the israelis, those have been gone for some time. now there is someth
this period? and related to this, as we all know, there is a war -- a civil war happening in syria. iran is a wrote ally of the assad regime. how is that affecting iran yeas security calculations? -- iran's security calculations? are they going to insert that into the p-5 plus one dialogue? how will you answer the questions? >> of course the middle east has stranged. the syrian war and now this confrontation between israel and hamas that somehow brought us back to the middle east that we used to know, the israelis and the arabs going at it and egypt. but right before that iran saw its for turns decline. its popularity in the arab streets declined because of the arab spring, and then the syrian situation has introduced some very, very important elements, almost sectarian element that declined -- that eroded iranian influence in the region and the projection of the iranian power hit a brick wall with that. so all of this of course closed into the mix of what iran is thinking. and this is one of the reasons this is a good time to start negotiating with iran. as its reach in the middle east
favor. >> let me ask about going north and west to syria. syria was discussed. the march was discussed the less difference is seen between the two candidates. it came down to should we be arming the opposition. let me ask you that in a broader question. issue with the farming the opposition? be arming thee opposition? >> the american position on foreign affairs and is like the second world war when the united states had a position of dominance. it was found to be transitory. we have that degree of preeminence. it is still the most single viable country and the world. the key to stability in many regions and progress, but when you say you're no longer preeminent it means that you have to be able to establish priorities. when you establish priorities, we have to begin with an analysis of what the problem is. i have great respect for them. i do not think that is a correct analysis. i think that assad started out [indiscernible] someone is driven by a great quest of power. he has certainly committed many outrageous act that is fundamentally a conflict for the ethnic and religious groups. t
, the opportunity for this to flourish. all-around, our region, from syria these days to hezbollah, hamas in the recent weeks, and always iran in the background -- we see all of the region looking at the united states as a source of support and hope against the bad guys, whoever they are, all around the region. we are highly appreciative. we always keep the right to defend ourself by ourselves when it is needed, but i think the role of the united states is invaluable in our region. we are looking for -- we do not desire war. we pursue peace. but unfortunately the neighborhood is extremely tough. no place for the fainthearted. there is no second opportunity for those who cannot defend themselves, no mercy for the week. we see this daily in syria and in other corners. but we are determined to flourish in spite of all of these developments. we are determined to make israel stronger and more secure. we will always stretch one hand to look for any opportunity to knock on any door, open any window, to find a way to make peace. we will always be ready with -- ready to pull it if it becomes ultim
like a straightforward issue in terms of intervening on syria, you only have five permanent members of the security council. and they cannot agree on something like this. you know, what has happened, obviously i think in the past couple decades, there's been an information revolution that has led to expectations that you articulated. in the gaza, it is live, in damascus, it is live. we have expectations for action. when we observe things like that, they are not seen it, there were not noted here our expectations are former limited. today, the public is globally connected and has certain expectations. and yet international institutions have not evolved in a powerful way. we still of the same institutions that have a political order since 2002. nobody can figure out how to do it. host: what is your relationship with benjamin netanyahu? guest: i do not have one. host: what about what is going on and syria, supplely into this current conflict? guest: it does. it does in two ways. in one way, it pushed syria off the front pages in the arab world. anytime you have a flare up on palestine,
have serious and continuing differences with russia -- on syria, missile defense, nato enlargement, a human-rights, and other issues. so we have to take a smart and balanced approach going forward. we need to continue expanding our engagement with russia, but with very clear rise about where we draw our lines. we also have to engage with a set of the emerging democratic powers like brazil and mexico, india and indonesia, south africa and turkey, that are exercising greater influence in their region and on the world stage. the strategic fundamentals of these relationships, shared democratic values, common economic and security priorities, are pushing our interests and do closer convergence. this is reflected in the broad strategic dialogue we have launched with the emerging powers. the key going forward will be to encourage them to leave behind the outdated politics of the past and take up the responsibilities that come with global influence, including defending our shared democratic values beyond their borders. let me turn to the third element of our agenda, what i call economic st
peaceful protests. obviously the situation in syria has dedoor yore rated -- has deteriorated since then. we have been engaged to help the opposition. we have committed to hundreds of millions of dollars of humanitarian aid to help folks both inside of syria and outside of syria. we are constantly consulting with the opposition on how they can get organized so that they're not splinters and divided in the face of the onslaught from the assaad regime. we are in very close contact with countries like turkey and jordan that immediately border syria and have an impact and obviously israel which is having already grave concerns as we do about, for example, movements of chemical weapons that might occur in such a chaotic atmosphere. and they could have an impact not just within syria but on the reas a whole. i'm encouraged to see that the syrian opposition created an umbrella group that may have more cohesion than they had in the past. we're going to be talking to them, my envoys are going to be traveling to various meetings taking place with the international community and the opposition. we
your allies to make a bolder move in syria? guest: the u.s. is already doing something. i think the rest of u.s. allies, turkey, they're afraid of getting involved in this conflict. the only pressure, i think, the most active countries right now are probably qatar and saudi arabia, which we believe are supplying arms to the free syrian army, to the rebels. the u.s. and turkey are actually doing some things, they have special forces along the border who are reportedly vetting to whom those arms get delivered so they don't get delivered into the most fundamentalist gee haw dee forces. i think it's unclear exactly what the status of that is right now. yfl that allies as it happened in libya and england sort of really took the bull by the horns and pulled the u.s. into action there. it doesn't seem like that is the case in syria. i think there's a fear that it could inflame the region and i think there's a degree of caution. host: benjamin pauker is senior editor of "foreign policy magazine." we'll get to your calls in a minute. could there be foreign policy fallout in the benghazi
not have the divisions we are facing in syria. i so far there are issues that they are facing but i think we should have hope and faith and i think with the political settlement this should provide a ground for hope in the future. thank you. >> thank you. greg. >> i would like to echo dan in thanking you all for coming out on this very dreary day especially after a holiday for i'm sure many of you. and thanks to you as well for staying up a little late and giving us his great insight. as all of us know, the united states has just been through a presidential election. president barack obama was reelected. and the obama administration had a number of i think foreign policy and counter terrorism successes during the first administration obviously osama bin laden was killed in the special operations raid. president obama has overseen the drawdown of troops in iraq as well as in afghanistan. and yet i think one of the most lasting legacies from the first term of the obama administration may well be what u.s. officials term the yemen model. this is sort of how it is that the u.s. is going to fi
to run roughshod over radical fundamentalists. these same people are working on syria. apparently flush from success in libya, the administration is preparing to ratchet up the war in syria. why? would qatar our partner in libya be supplying weapons to syria without the support of this administration in nato, meaning the u.s., discusses putting missiles in turkey which creates a detack toe no-fly zone over northwestern syria, expanding the war. is this why we need a tax increase? more money for more war? really? the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from ohio as expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> i rise to con garage late the randolph cardinals on their victory in the title game at the carrier dome in syracuse, new york. led by head coach and the most valuable player cody aldro, the cardinals won. mr. reed: it is with pride we recognize the coaches, administrators and most importantly the parents and kids for thei
, but neither do i see it as very helpful in pressing russia on issues like iran or their conduct towards syria. russian opposition level leaders, however, and russian civil society, and the russian press, what free press remains in russia today really support this legislation. and i think what this legislation intends is sort of a mutually beneficial relationship with russia based on a rule of law. based on human rights. that's the hope. it includes the sergei magnitsky legislation that came out of the foreign affairs committee of which i am an original co-sponsor, and i do think we owe a debt of gratitude to chairman ros-lehtinen for her determination to have that provision in the legislation. and i think if we reflect on the words of the russian opposition in their parliament, one said recently, this provision is very pro-russian. it helps defend us in russia from criminals. it helps defend us from criminals who kill our citizens, who steal our money, and hide it abroad. and that's the point. that's what we are trying to do with that provision. and this bill liberalizing trade while at the s
now in what's happening in syria, but the coverage of what's happening in syria is not bad but i don't know that it's shed a great deal of light and part of the problem is, even there, you were asking about -- i know you began by asking about what's happening in gaza right now and that i what i think of k konk -- coverage of that, i did hear you correctly? >> yes. >> any time israel is involved in a story it, becomes an excruciatingly difficult story for american journalists to cover because there is a -- for the most part -- a natural sympathy in this country, a sense of identity in this country with israelis and many reporters, old friends and colleagues of mine, the late peter jennings, used to, i think, very unfairly be criticized for taking an anti-israeli point of view. it wasn't so much an anti-israeli point of view as that he had spent many years living in the arab world and had a sympathetic point of view to arabs. i think what is happening in gaza right now meets almost any definition of tragedy. the israelis cannot be expected, on the one hand, to stand by while their citi
east and north africa. at some point, we must find ways to peacefully resolve the war in syria, the conflict between israel and the palestinians and to the destabilizing threat from iran. and every time and overtime, we also must address religious, economic and cultural differences that create tension and that are exploited by extremists. still, as our country emerges from a decade of large-scale conflict and confronts new fiscal constraints here at home, i frankly worry that our political system will prevent us from making the investments in diplomacy and development that we need to ensure we protect america's interests in these volatile regions of the world. these investments, unfortunately, lack a constituency in the congress at a time of great fiscal pressure. indeed, we face the prospect of budget sequestration. it would be devastating to national security not just because of what it does to our national defense, but also for what it does to these programs that support diplomacy and enhance our quality of life. our men and women in uniform know too well what sacrifice is a
toward is syria and iran, and that is what they want to be able to concentrate on. if it is ambassador rice who is nominated to the secretary of state, this is an issue that will come up again in the purposes of debate over a nomination and may come up with another nominee as well. senator john kerry has defended ambassador rice and therefore may be asked to explain that if he were nominated. to the extent -- i do think primarily between now and the end of the year, the debate will be focused on domestic, economic, and fiscal issues. host: let's go to foreign policy because "the washington times" as this headline -- scott wilson, do you expect that he does that? troops on the ground? guest: i do not expect troops on the grand. as far as the president would go in syria, the next step is some kind of a no-fly zone. you will start seeing the model that he put in place and advocated for in libya. he is someone who moves incrementally. the next real step is the first plunge into military would be directly harming the rebels. they do not know the rebels that well. they do not want to start s
. this is not something the obama administration is eager to bring up again. what they are looking toward is syria and iran, and that is what they want to be able to concentrate on. if it is ambassador rice who is nominated to the secretary of state, this is an issue that will come up again in the purposes of debate over a nomination and may come up with another nominee as well. senator john kerry has defended ambassador rice and therefore may be asked to explain that if he were nominated. to the extent -- i do think primarily between now and the end of the year, the debate will be focused on domestic, economic, and fiscal issues. host: let's go to foreign policy because "the washington times" as this headline -- scott wilson, do you expect that he does that? troops on the ground? guest: i do not expect troops on the grand. as far as the president would go in syria, the next step is some kind of a no-fly zone. you will start seeing the model that he put in place and advocated for in libya. he is someone who moves incrementally. the next real step is the first plunge into military would be directly
into syria. the fellow that did the movie to begin with got murdered. i agree to put some other information on -- am going to put some other information on youtube. some of it is so graphic that will have to get it myself. soldiers and democrats hate soldiers. i do not know why they hate them so bad. this movie is when to make amends with them. i appreciate your time. guest: i look forward to seeing the evidence, but one of the great myths is the weapons of mass destruction were taken to syria. i have looked at the evidence that has been available. the best evidence is the truck convoys moving from baghdad to syria just before the american invasion. what they were with the bath party records and personal wealth and all sorts of things that later were used to do fund the beginning of the insurgency in iraq. it was not weapons of mass destruction. there are films of weapons of mass destruction be used, because the dog hussain use them against the kurdish people in airstrikes years earlier. i wonder whether some of what you've seen might be the strikes on the kurds. host: a question on twitter
with their cameras all over the world. i found myself thinking as i was watching about everyone, folks in syria and homs, they show what they could, to folks here in oakland with camera phones trying to show police misbehaving. somebody, the act of journalism, how to protect people, whether they are citizens or professionals -- what do you think? we do not have a conversation about that. should there be an international standard of journalistic rights, if you are committing journalism you should be protected? how you protect those folks? >> good luck implementing that law. is a great question. something journalists and tijuana struggle with all the time with the rise of social media and websites a lot of you have heard about -- including one which started out as a compendium of information about basically narco turf wars, shootings in the streets, the headings. it started off as a visual wallpaper and has since become interesting, more sophisticated, and is beginning to write articles and put -- and the editor is anonymous, but they are beginning to publish pieces. this thing that was touted ea
the war in syria, the conflict between israel and the palestinians, and the destabilizing threat from iran and every time and overtime we also must address the religious, economic and cultural differences that create tension and that are exploited by extremists. still, as our country emerges from a decade of large-scale conflict and confronts new fiscal constraints at home, i, frankly, worry that our political system will prevent us from making the investments in diplomacy and development that we need to ensure we protect america's interests in these volatile regions of the world. these investments unfortunately lack a constituency in the congress at a time of great fiscal pressure. indeed, we face the process of budget sequestration that would be devastating to national security, not just because what have it does to our national defense, but also for what it does to these programs that support diplomacy and enhance our quality of life. our men and women in uniform know too well what sacrifice is all about for the sake of our nation. for more than a decade after we were attacked on septem
? >> rocky is correct about following the constitution. i would not be in syria unless congress makes a declaration of war. we will not stay in afghanistan if i'm elected president unless congress makes a declaration of war. only by going through that constitutional process can we ensure that the will of the american people is addressed when we have issues like syria, afghanistan, and iraq. >> gary, this has to be rebuttal. do you want to rebut something, gary? >> i was opposed to going into iraq before we went into iraq. i did not think they had weapons of mass destruction. i thought if they had weapons of mass destruction, we have the capability to see weapons of mass destruction. afghanistan, i thought that was totally warranted. we were attacked, we attacked back. i would argue after having been in afghanistan for six months, we wiped out al-qaeda. that was 11 years ago. we should have gotten out of afghanistan 11 years ago. [applause] here we are now on iran. the demonstration after 9/11 was in iran by over one million citizens that showed up in support of the united states. and
, which you read about every day, whether it be syria, iran, whether it be pakistan. continuing work in afghanistan. the sunni-shiia fault lines in the middle east. whether it be the pacific with the rise of china. we look at what's going on with the islands within the pacific. korea, 29-year-old leader in charge of korea. what is he going to do in the future? you have narcoterrorism, transnarcoterrorism, what does that mean to the future and security of our country? i don't know. but these are questions we have to take a look at. and these are questions that we have to be prepared to operate in. the other thing that i have learned frankly, the hard way, over the last several years my time in iraq is you have also have opportunists who will try to take advantage of instability and destabilizing influence and nascent governments or failing governments. and these opportunists are maybe unpredictable. and i always use iraq as an example. there's lots of opportunists in iraq. iran, turkey, saudi arabia, kuwait, nonstate actors. all opportunists trying to take advantage of a situation. ho
policy is one of the main things. that made me decide on picking obama. we have more troops in syria and libya -- the country is going crazy. host: i will give you a chance to jump and. guest: i will address food stamps. we have not in a meaningful enough improvement to pull a lot of people off of food stamps. pull people off of welfare. a lot of these support programs -- we need to see a much broader recovery to see improvement in that sense. when the most striking figures that comes out every month and this report -- if you looked at the breakdown of unemployment by education -- people -- the unemployment rate across the nation for people 16 and older, is 7.9%. people 25 years of age and older, the unemployment rate if you have a bachelor's degree or higher is 3.8%. it is still higher than it was, of course, before the downturn. but the 3.8% is substantially lower than the right across the economy. for someone who does not have a high-school diploma that did not graduate from high school, the unemployment rate is 12.2%. that is if you have not graduated from high school. if you hav
this feminist addition. >> he have had it three years. you have had dramatic situations enter libya, syria. the camp are two examples. it is pretty difficult to slip -- flip a switch. part of the obama philosophy -- which is very interesting -- trying to find what is possible lead control this. that does not get america caught in the truck of unnecessary war. he have these two examples the most striking. people on the street clearly with opposition to the dictator there. there are plenty of examples. bush, a junior with a crackdown there. lots of examples where we tell people where brush, same year says, you want to crack down, we will not get involved there. that is a typical way of it going down. 4 blessed is a, you do not get to crackdown and have america stand aside. he will not keep your mind if he did necessarily. that was the key factor that of them crushed out. libya is a different story we have a possibility of a massacre occurring. obama said, i will like to stop that from happening. if i can i get a true blue coalition through the you and i will not do it to it. critics howled a
be regarding syria? 5000 people killed in the uprising. caller: those rebels are not syrian. they were planted there. it is really funny. when obama put troops into israel, i think he did all of this for reelection. i am relieved mitt romney did not get elected even though i did not vote for either. i think obama might do the right thing and cut ties with israel. host: we will go to a report actually on syrian president assad. this in "usa today." he said "i am not a puppet." we have a few minutes left on the first segment of "the washington journal." we will go to pete in rhode island on the democrat line. caller: good morning. i would like to see him focus on the economy. host: specifically what part? caller: let's go with the fiscal cliff coming up. my thoughts were my belief is, and i hope somebody calls and corrects me or you correct me, if the fiscal cliff is reached on january 1, the first thing to go would be the bust tax cuts. everything else will be phased in over time. we can let the tax cuts hit. it will then come to the table and negotiate everything else. do not paint a draconian
up the top line foreign policy issues, like syria and iran, but also others like foreign aid which has a nice rubber duckie on the catalog today. it helps pay our salaries. >> i think bob corker will be interesting as ranking member on foreign relations. he skipped the republican convention this summer to go to the middle east. and he has been doing a lot of traveling. he is super smart about these kinds of things. i think he will try to mold himself a little bit -- not completely, like dick lugar, honestly. he will be against the hawks i think on a number of occasions. we did a story recently about him and we had john mccain talk about how much -- how much he respected and although they did not always see eye to eye. but i think the foreign relations panel in both chambers, sense, i guess, the 1960's, just as not had as much as an impact on what the president does as it used to. if kerry becomes the secretary of state, i guess you end up taking what he was hoping to do -- and at the administration level. but it reiterates what i am saying, which is you can't do much until you are
, especially given recent evidence that their shipments to syria and elsewhere? >> with respect to north korea -- they would have to demonstrate a series of meeting their data goal of denuclearization. we have engaged with the north normal basand is. we have not seen the steps. we have laid out what they need to do in terms of that kind of demonstration of seriousness with respect to denuclearization. have not seen that from them. there is an interesting question about burma. and the united states and embrace ofbama's their reform efforts and support for it. in no other way that you can imagines is an entry by berman into the international community is what comes of that and the opportunity that it provides. economically. that is an important focus of the burmese leadership. the economic prospects and promises of their coming into the international community and supported by the u.s. that is a path that if the north koreans would address the nuclear issue, that would be available to them. we have said that from the outset. it is an important example for them to contemplate. it is a regime that
on in syria, for example, i am reminded in a worry some way of what happened 16, 17 years ago, almost two decades ago. are we capable of learning from those types of experiences? are we capable of allowing a situation to deteriorate further and further into more and more hatred and the inability of this country to come together again? i am worried that we are not capable -- we seem to be not capable of this moment to use the kind of diplomacy that i think would be highly desirable, to find a way to work with russia to work out a deal to go forward. i just want to make that point that paula also made. as wonderful as all the modern tools are, the world will not allow us to get away with tools. we will need to confront the situation, and i think the moment is here. it is overdue. it is extremely urgent to find a way to end the killing in syria. it sets a terrible example to other bad guys in the region and elsewhere if we do not act. >> we are going to have to wrap it up pretty soon, but we will take two more comments. >> thank you. in the australian high commissioner in ottawa. i am standi
with syria and russia. this is just over an hour. >> i am going to be very brief in introducing our two panelists. i think they are -- i am also going to be in the discussion, for which jonathan promised me two cookies instead of one, for doing double duty. i am not going to say anything substantive about this panel other than looking at the u.s. side of things and the regional side of things, they mesh very well and they also mesh with the first panel. i think we all know jeffrey. the founding director of the thornton center and the senior director at the nfc under president obama for the first two plus years i guess. he has written, by the way, a wonderful book accounting that time, which i think is probably available in the brookings bookstore, and which is probably a great read. jonathan is the current acting director of the thornton center, somebody i must say that, on a personal level, when he was out in the wilds of california, some place beyond the appellation, i think, i used to turn to his right things to understand what was going on in northeast asia. i did not know him, but
-- [inaudible] unlike in syria. so we don't have the division that we're facing in syria. so we have a unified international community and that helps support the political settlement. so i think this opportunity should be used. so far there are cycles the settlements are facing but we should have hope and faith and i think with the success of this political settlement, this provides a ground for hope in the future. thank you. >> thank you. greg? >> yeah, i'd like to echo dan in thanking you all for coming out on this very dreary day. especially after a holiday for i'm sure many of you. and thanks to ibrahim as well from doha for stage up a little bit late and giving us those great insights. as all of us know, the united states has just been through a presidential election. president obama was re-elected. and the obama administration had a number of i think foreign policy and counterterrorism successes during the first administration. obviously osama bin laden was killed in the special operations raid. president obama's oversea drawdown of tops in iraq as well as afghanistan. and yet i think on
security? whether it be in the middle east, which you read about every day, whether it be syria, iran, whether it be pakistan. continuing work in afghanistan. the sunni-shiia fault lines in the middle east. whether it be the pacific with the rise of china. we look at what's going on with the islands within the pacific. korea, 29-year-old leader in charge of korea. what is he going to do in the future? you have narcoterrorism, transnarcoterrorism, what does that mean to the future and security of our country? i don't know. but these are questions we have to take a look at. and these are questions that we have to be prepared to operate in. the other thing that i have learned frankly, the hard way, over the last several years my time in iraq is you have also have opportunists who will try to take advantage of instability and destabilizing influence and nascent governments or failing governments. and these opportunists are maybe unpredictable. and i always use iraq as an example. there's lots of opportunists in iraq. iran, turkey, saudi arabia, kuwait, nonstate actors. all opportunists tr
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 64 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)